So, the FedEx Cup is Over. Let's Fix It. Again.
by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 2, 2008 2:48 PM EDT
13 comments
It looks like no matter how you slice the points scale that if you have someone who is ranked in the top 10 in points win two events out of the possible four in the Playoffs that they're a LOCK to win the FedEx Cup.
That's why I'm going out on a limb and personally congratulating Vijay Singh for his FedEx Cup victory and $10 million. It's so over that this is the scenario for Singh to lose:
To miss out on the bonus, Singh would have to finish dead last in the remaining two events while someone in the top 24 of the standings would have to win both.
Volatility sure did work in making this thing exciting.
That's the interesting thing about the NASCAR version of playoffs - the Chase for the Championship. Somehow, the 10 races generally seem to mean something because you earn goofy points for all kinds of things.
Golf is different, though. You would have to create a system that is almost impossible to understand for it to be truly volatile. Adding 2000 to the number of points awarded at each place and tightening the reset did create volatility.
The Tour made the standings more volatile because of two reasons:
- It was too difficult for players to move up significantly during the four week Playoffs.
- They wanted to make each tournament more about the guys who would be playing the next week than the guys who wouldn't be making that next leap.
But, the problem is that the Tour focused too much on the end product. They worried too much about where guys finish in the end of a tournament.
Don't get me wrong. Winning should mean the most at a golf tournament. After all, we don't cut checks (right now at least) for the guy who lead after the first round, unless he won the tournament. But, maybe the Tour should award FedEx Cup points that way.
Why not give bonus points to guys who finish in the top 10 after each round of the tournament? That way, being consistent throughout an event would matter.
How about some points for the guys who had the best five rounds that day? At least having a hot hand for one round might save your tournament.
Maybe we could have statistical points. You know, for the guys who have Pyrrhic victories every week. Bonus points for the leaders in driving distance (JB Holmes), greens in regulation (Fred Funk), and putting (newfangled Vijay Singh).
Let's make each shot and each round more meaningful by offering points to guys who perform well at different stages of the tournament. That would create some volatility and encourage players to be interested in all aspects of golf. Yes, the end result would still matter the most, but players could make serious moves if they do the right things for several rounds of a tournament.
0 recs |
13 comments
Email
Print
Comments
so, what's wrong ??
Had this same discussion on Sunday. Last year, the points were spread so far that hardly anybody from the bottom of each week’s field had no shot to make it to the next week without a win – and that wasn’t going to happen. The new points setup helps the bottom guys more than the top – so they have a punchers chance to move on.
The whining this year is coming from the top players who seem to think that they “deserve” an easy path into the Tour Championship and a shot at the Fed Ex Cup prize money. Problem is – except for Vijay and Sergio, the top guys have absolutely stunk it up.
Not the Tour or Fed Ex’s fault – strictly the players. Even with last year’s playoff point system, these guys wouldn’t be in position to challenge for the Cup.
I don’t like forcing some artificial style points system on the playoffs – they work just fine. If the Tampa Bay Rays and Milwaukee Brewers are in the World Series this year instead of the Spankees and Cubs – so be it. They will have earned their way – just like Streelman and Sutherland have done. Harrington has all but played his way out of the running, and may not even make it to Atlanta for the free money. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Mickelnuts skips The Tour Championship if he doesn’t win in St Louis this week.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Sep 2, 2008 3:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Trying to make it fun
That and relevance for golf in the fall are the aims of this thing. It really hasn’t done that in the past two years. I’m just batting ideas around to help the PGA Tour make this thing worth my attention, or anyone else’s. I like that Vijay is winning, but the fact that he gets $10 million for beating two choke artists in a playoff and blowing out a guy whose psyche won’t let him win right now (Weir) isn’t that much fun.
I’d rather watch Georgia Tech next week who is +7 against Boston College. (You should bet your mortgage on that line.)
by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 2, 2008 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
relevance ?
It’s golf – trying to force a high dollar “playoff” system – during football season. You might as well try to replace a snail race for NASCAR. There isn’t any relevance. People who demand that only the top players make golf interesting need to stand up and condemn a playoff system and get things back to how they were before this Fed Ex nonsense. Just go back to the Tour Championship where the top 30 players on the money list get invited to East Lake for one big paycheck. If you wants your playoffs – you takes your chances. Relevance is…well…irrelevant.
Not sure what you mean by the last TWO years. Last year, Tiger dominated the rankings, money list, and Fed Ex Cup points – then he went out and steamrolled the Tour Championship to collect first prize money there and the Fed Ex Cup race. How much more correct could last year have been ?
Better watch it with those Weir shots – he might regrow the beard and put you into the boards !! :-)
Tech is getting 7 from BC – but which side of the line are you putting the mortgage ? :-0 Tech looked good against an overmatched opponent – and BC’s QB is playing here in Atlanta, too !
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Sep 2, 2008 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would be ok
with the beard. I’m growing one myself!
I agree that Tiger dominated last year, but the Playoffs just weren’t relevant. Again, the idea is to make golf relevant. The FedEx Cup isn’t doing that. I don’t know how to make it any clearer than that.
We can all go back to when the Tour Championship was in November, 26 guys showed, and everyone got free money for no good reason. I can’t wait to tune in for that.
by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 2, 2008 8:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
that would be the whole point...
IF the point of the playoffs and the Fed Ex Cup is to identify (and reward) the best of the best – then last year’s playoffs did exactly that. Woods had 3 wins and Mickelson 1. Woods brought his Buick wheelbarrow each week and took home a big pile of cash. Last year’s point system was set up so that the top guys would feel no pressure.
IF the playoffs are supposed to be PLAYOFFS – then keep the points close and let the player who plays best over the four weeks win.
Take your pick. Personally, I don’t see much of a point to either system – at least not at this point in time. There isn’t anyone close enough to Tiger Woods to even make a good discussion on the topic.. If the whole idea is to crown the best player – just send the check to Orlando in care of that guy with the limp and the hot wife.
It doesn’t matter how many players show up in Atlanta as long as they are playing good golf. What bugs me is that if some of the top 30 don’t want to play – they still get a check – but if Rory Sabattini pulls out of Tiger’s tournament, he’s the scum of the earth for accepting that check.
BUT – back to the subject of relevance – you didn’t say which way the GT v BC game would go with Tech getting 7. :-)
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Sep 2, 2008 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I want GT +7
bet the mortgage!
True that Tiger’s dominance kind of makes the FEC a moot point in some ways.
I condemn anyone who takes a free paycheck and doesn’t pay :) They should mail it to me.
by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 2, 2008 10:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
a wise man
I hope you’re right on this game. Should be interesting, with you guys breaking in a bunch of new key players, and us still getting used to a new coach and system. Unfortunately, I’ll be somewhere on the front 9 at the RTJ course in Prattville around kickoff, so we’ll probably miss the whole game.
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Sep 3, 2008 9:06 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm a Maryland grad :)
I am only slightly interested in the actual teams…haha.
by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 3, 2008 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
be true to your....ummm....
…conference ??
So – the TRUE sports season doesn’t start until the guys in shorts take the round balls inside. I spent 2 years in Durham becoming an ACC hoops fan. None better !
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Sep 3, 2008 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't agree more
I just wish the NCAA selection committee would get over their crushes on mid-majors.
by Ryan Ballengee on Sep 3, 2008 2:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Darn right...
…NCAA selection day – first 12 teams taken…The ACC ! :-)
"this ball will fit in that fairway"
by courtgolf on Sep 3, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why points?
I think if it were up to me, I’d completely ditch the points system once the playoffs begin. Then, I’d proceed like virtually every sport on earth does. Once the playoffs start, it doesn’t matter what a team does in the regular season.
The points system should get a player in the door and that’s it. After that. Start with a field of however large and cut it by a third or half each week and finish with a relatively small field at the Tour Championship. The winner of that event wins the Fed Ex cup.
Doing it that way runs the risk of getting no-name players through the system, but by definition it would also make sure the best golf is being rewarded. Isn’t that what we want?
I didn’t really understand the complaining by Boo Weekly and others about how they had good years and then got bounced early. It’s the playoffs! Now, Vijay Singh can basically go back to missing cuts if he wants (not that he will) and win the cup. How much sense does that make?
by Double Eagle on Sep 3, 2008 4:25 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I like it.
I like your concept of starting over at playoff time. I think it’s just a matter of the players and fans realizing that there is a separate competition happening during the regular season.
Since were talking about fixing things I’ll throw my concept out there – divide the season into 3 or 4 sections – in each section a certain number of players qualify (using some kind of point system) for the first round of playoffs – say 40 players. In each successive section, if you’ve already qualified and you make the top 40 again, you knock other people out of a chance. (Only knew guys to the top 40 get in, not taking the next 40 that didn’t qualify in the first section.) So players that play the early season tournaments and qualify and then fizzle out will still make round one, and if players want to make the playoffs they are going to need to play well in a certain part of the year. Players in in the Top 10 in at least 2 sections automatically qualify to get into round 2 if they miss the cut in the first week of playoffs. The top 3 players in each section can qualify into round 2 as well.
Once the playoffs start there are no points – you play to survive to the next round – and the field gets cut each week (like now) just based on the performance of each week…the fall back is that some players can make it to round 2 if they played well during the regular season but faltered the first week.
by red tees on Sep 4, 2008 4:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Waggle Room
Related FanShots on Waggle Room
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
